So Core is clearly wining the XT vote - BUT what are the Core devs doing?

[kano]

Blocktrail shows that of the last 500 blocks there are only 2 votes for XT (BIP101)

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

Yet in there 4 pools AntPool, BTCChina, 21 Inc and KFC
seem to have got confused about what is actually going on ... and SEEM to be voting quite highly for BIP100

They are using the BIP100 method for change the block size IF BIP100 was already implemented.
I guess Garzik forgot to state anywhere how to vote for BIP100

I am 100% certain that if there was a clear method to vote for the hard fork of BIP100 then many more pools would quickly jump in and support it.

Any Bitcoin Devs out there willing to actually resolve this? ... and then we can see the whole XT debate disappear in a flash and the XT altcoin go where it belongs ... into oblivion.

[1714835641]

1714835641

[1714835641]

1714835641

[1714835641]

1714835641

[tupelo]

I found an explanation by Maxwell here: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/37945
The vote occurs via the size of a specific field.

It is certainly going to be interesting to see Gavin Andresen in the altcoin section  

[OmegaStarScream]

But the question remain ... If we Bitcoin Core wins then when the hell we are going to see the increase of the blocksize , because we will definitly not go mainstream without increasing the blocksize , that's for sure . So Core developpers should step up and do something about it , also why it's not possible to implent increase of blocksize on the current Core

[Muhammed Zakir]

-snip- also why it's not possible to implent increase of blocksize on the current Core

It's possible but a better solution is yet to be found. So wait... Or maybe, its better to have a temporary higher block size limit until a better solution is found.

[bimasena25]

now, not so good,.
dollar kurs to my domestic money ( rupiahs) increase significantly, while bitcoin rates stagnant position

[wtogami]

https://scalingbitcoin.org/montreal2015/

[dserrano5]

https://scalingbitcoin.org/montreal2015/

Javacript required. Yeah totally.

[RustyNomad]

So it looks like we will only see any changes towards early next year.

The first workshop is now in September with a planned second workshop for end November/December. I take it there will be some more discussions after that before anything gets implemented so from that it looks like first quarter next year before we will see any changes being made to core.

Think the main point at this stage is to get some consensus going. Glad to see so many of the bigger names involved in this workshop.

[Blawpaw]

The only thing that is really happening with all this nonsense is that they are splitting the community.

This only benefits corporations and proves that Banks and governments want to suffocate a perfectly frre industry...

[kano]

Meanwhile:

Blocks have begun appearing with /BIP100/ in them after some (indirect) discussions
Already 10% after only 2 days - yeah one of them is my pool
and as expected XT is still not showing much, around 1%

and:

Someone asked on the bitcoin mailing list the state of BIP100 and garzik replied:
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010621.html

[coinpr0n]

Meanwhile:

Blocks have begun appearing with /BIP100/ in them after some (indirect) discussions
Already 10% after only 2 days - yeah one of them is my pool
and as expected XT is still not showing much, around 1%

and:

Someone asked on the bitcoin mailing list the state of BIP100 and garzik replied:
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010621.html

Good to know he's working on it, though it's a little behind schedule as the BIP originally wanted to run on testnet by September 1st.

[kano]

Meanwhile:

Blocks have begun appearing with /BIP100/ in them after some (indirect) discussions
Already 10% after only 2 days - yeah one of them is my pool
and as expected XT is still not showing much, around 1%

and:

Someone asked on the bitcoin mailing list the state of BIP100 and garzik replied:
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010621.html

Good to know he's working on it, though it's a little behind schedule as the BIP originally wanted to run on testnet by September 1st.

Well, to be blunt, I'm of the opinion that there is no desperate urgency to push it "right now".
XT has caused this 'desperation' and hopefully the block debate will subside soon if, as I expect, a majority will push for BIP100.
As long as jgarzik doesn't drag it on until the end of the year, and something is there ready to go into core soon, that resolves any block size issue IMO.

[neutraLTC]

BTCChina & F2pool are now publicly endorsing BIP100.  https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

[coinpr0n]

Slush Pool not actually running XT: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3iacvf/the_hard_fork_will_bitcoin_xt_take/cuezquz

[kano]

Slush Pool not actually running XT: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3iacvf/the_hard_fork_will_bitcoin_xt_take/cuezquz

Yeah that doesn't makes a lot of sense
All the blocks that have the XT header are slush and only slush.
I guess he just changed the version then.

[neutraLTC]

Bitfury group is also showing support for BIP 100:  https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pool/bitfury